He drops is g's when he's fired up, doesn't he? Why do politicians do that? To seem folksy?

Well, shucks, I guess I do that too, sometimes, in real non-online life.

(I sent a comment to instapundit during the height of the campaign, during 'bittergate', something along the lines of 'four years of looking down on me and asking me to pay for it.' Hmmmm......not wrong so far, was I?

Poor guy (seriously). It's a hard job. Even though I don't super-like him, and kind of want him to fail, I don't really want him to fail because that would hurt a lot of people. I would like him to, um, have an epiphany! A different one!)

Stimulating government via more government spending doesn't solve the problem.

There's nothing he can do to stop the deleveraging and bankruptcies except slow them down, which would be like using a penknife instead of a chain-saw to trim limbs off trees after an ice storm. He needs to get the pain over now, so people will have forgotten by 2012 when he's running again.

He's got to get the wreckage out of the way so the garage inventors and venture capitalists can build the future. If we don't do it right, those garages will be in China.

I dunno. McCain has a reputation as a hothead but the criticism you linked to seems pretty reasonable to me.

“The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy,” McCain said. “There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or ever. Or ever.”

Anyone else notice how he began by congratulating himself and the party for (supposedly) splitting the stimulus evenly between tax cuts and spending... and ended by asserting that stimulus is spending by definition?

Anyone else notice how he began by congratulating himself and the party for (supposedly) splitting the stimulus evenly between tax cuts and spending... and ended by asserting that stimulus is spending by definition

when the democrats speak of "tax cuts" they are typically talking not about rate cuts, but about creating "rebate checks". Rate cuts have a long term impact. Rebate checks are just more spending.

here is a great analysis of the House bill.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pV-c6t5fOVmNorqMpHvnCMw

my favorite is $245,000,000 for Agriculture to:

‘‘Salaries and Expenses,’’ for the purpose of maintaining and modernizing the information technology system

You know, I'm joking, but I'm also scared. Because he looks scared. I see panic in his eyes. I haven't been able to watch the entire clip (and this is only part 1 of the speech), because I don't want to see this panic.

The answer to your partisan prayers. Apocalypse Now. The giver of the "I have a Nightmare" speech who has just rammed a multi-trillion dollar deficit spending package down the American people's throats. Some of them are ecstatic to be participating in the national blowjob.

Fred4Pres - LOVE that clip of Milton to Phil Bleeding Heart Donahue. Milton to Phil and other "capitalism is evil" types: Grow up.

I wish Obama and others understood what Milton is saying.

As for Obama - he is pretty wimpy. He is all about "looking" presidential (the poses), but the facade really does crack pretty easily. He has often whined about how tired and revealed thin skin before he was sworn in - why would that change now.

the badmouthing in these comments is a sorry sight indeed. After 8 years of Bush, you find this and that to pick on? get over it. The American people wanted Obama and guess what: his ratings remain high, despite venom spewers who offer no other plan to help us out in this economic crisis. And the silly comment that "leftys" wanted Bush to fail? Show me. Bush failed from the onset and liberals dumped on what he was doing to the nation, the things Obama now trying to reverse and fix.

I didn't watch the whole clip either. I can't say that he looked scared as much as I think he looked confused, lost. His accomplishments in life, excluding his getting elected and promoted is nil. America will look a lot like the south side of Chicago, when this empty suit is finished.

ann said...You know, I'm joking, but I'm also scared. Because he looks scared. I see panic in his eyes.

We don't call him Bambi, Deer in the headlights Obama for nothing.

Seriously though, his main speaking style these days seems to be to use fear, crisis, catastrophy, etc to surge enactment of his policies without due consideration.

Constrast that to FDR, and the we have nothing to fear, but fear itself approach.

Most of the economic problems beyond the direct banking/housing knot is a problem with consumer confidence. A President's biggest impact is ultimately there, and Obama is working continually to undermine confidence and spread fear. That doesn't seem productive unless you want to drive the country deeper into a Bush depression so you can be the hero on the natural eventual upside.

McCain's objections made sense to me. He's a much better loyal opposition than leader, I guess.

In the blog world, he would be a commenter, not a blogger!

As to Obama's demeanor, I think he's acting. He doesn't have a clue what to do or say. He's a community organizer, and this speech would go over well trying to convince a hundred folks to go picket an alderman to get a new bike park.

There is a reason Barack Obama's temperament is famously unflappable. He has always had the MSM standing there to diss the opposition so he doesn't have to and therefore he can seem unflappable. Now he is the one in charge and he is showing us that he is not only flappable, he is totally clueless as to what to do to fix the problems. Now what are his supporters going to do!

We are stuck with a rookie who has not a clue what to do and is totally decision-averse. Result so far is that he is being taken to the woodshed by his own party leaders in Congress and he is trying to sell the product they have produced which even the CBO has told us won't work.

Not only that, but he has now chosen, at the starting gate really, to be totally partisan. Not A President for the entire nation. A President of the democratic Party and only the Democratic Party. All pretense of bi-partisanship, Words. Just Words.

He has a chance, though, to be the knight in shining armor. He can veto this whole shebang.

Say, "I made a mistake when I asked for "shovel-ready" projects because that opened the door for every pork-barrel project under the sun. That wasn't what I meant. So let's table all these good ideas for a time when we are flush with cash again, and right now let's go back to square one, define and face the problem, suggest and weed out solutions, and embark on a path that will actually HELP and not harm our nation."

I don't think he looks scared.He looks as if he cannot believe he is being challenged, and he is angry about it. He wants his audience to believe those that disagree with him must be mocked.His history is one of a very cutthroat politician, even if his reputation is that of a man who will listen.He's never been in charge of a group that had anything but his success as the goal. He is used to being able to berate people into doing what he wants.

The Drill SGT said..."[H]is main speaking style these days seems to be to use fear, crisis, catastrophy, etc to surge enactment of his policies without due consideration."

And yet he promised that we had chosen hope over fear! I simply don't understand how the left can bleat about how Bush used "fear" as a selling point for policy when economic and ecological fear is their primary sales tool these days.

Ann Althouse said..."You know, I'm joking, but I'm also scared. Because he looks scared. I see panic in his eyes."

Wrong. Slightly more than 50% wanted Obama. I never wanted this pretentious, empty suited prick to be President.

He IS scared because suddenly he realizes the enormity of the job. That is isn't a cake walk after all and that HE is going to be responsible for this fiasco. He is not in control. Doesn't know how to take control. Peolosi and Reid are in charge and he knows it.

Be afraid. Be very afraid. We have the mental and emotional equivilant of high school sophomores running the country.

Hey, Barack, you know what? I don't give a fuck about your staff being worn out, or Pelosi's either. And quit scolding us because you're pissed off and feeling defensive. You're not our father; you're not our boss. And I'm definitely not unflappable, so screw you.

I see the Hate America First contingent is out and about today. Back in from the Jihadi Chat Rooms to say hello DBQ? We have 2 wars going on and all you can do is spit on the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces?

But I'm not calling you a terrorist or saying you're unpatriotic though. I support the right to dissent, even people like you and Fred Phelps.

Funny. I didn't vote for Obama, frankly don't like him, but I have a completely different take on this speech than almost everyone else here. Yes, he looks tired, and yes, he looks frustrated, but this seems like a half-time rally speech to a team that's not playing well. It seems perfectly appropriate to the moment, and I can imagine millions of Americans who would be thrilled to hear their president speak with this kind of energy and passion. If he think things are this urgent, well, then "unflappable" surely won't cut it.

Back in from the Jihadi Chat Rooms to say hello DBQ? We have 2 wars going on and all you can do is spit on the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces?

Are you fucking kidding me? This from the perpetually spitting on Bush garage? Don't make me laugh.

Obama doesn't have a clue on how to govern. He never had to be accountable for anything in his life. He hasn't had to face any real opposition in his political or even academic career. When everyone tells him how wonderful he is and what charisma he has and he is suddenly faced with those who can see that the Emperor has no clothes, the frustration is apparent. This is what happens when we have an affirmative action President.

This shitty spending pork laden political payola bill is an economic disaster. YOU voted for this idiot. Hope you like the consequences.

No big surprise that Althouse believed the hype and wasn't able to accurately judge his personality type.

Meanwhile, my discussion of his personality type was the second reason to oppose him that I posted on 10/29/08. Read all twenty items on the list and compare them to what you've heard from Althouse, Insty, and all the rest.

Obama wants to run the largest enterprise in the world. He hasn't run a state. He hasn't run a city. He hasn't run a corner store. He has never run anything. And the idea that he could learn to be president as an internship just doesn't make any sense.

freshlegacy, you have identified part of the problem. Obama is talking to "the team" and choosing sides, pushing for his way, NOT rising above it and looking out for the league. He wants to raise the ticket price to $1,000 a seat, and doesn't care if it means the death of the sport. Doesn't care what the other teams, or coaches, or the fans, want.

I didn't see that speech as whining. I saw it as a declaration of war with the other side - us. His own people.

That's his war. He doesn't care about the terrorists - nor does he care about the victims of the Cole bombing/attack on the US - but you can bet that if those victims were community organizers who had been hit by a car, he would be standing on his bullypulpit, demanding swift justice and retribution.

It's a matter of where his priorities are, and they are still in the activist partisan sandbox.

Yes, he looks tired, and yes, he looks frustrated, but this seems like a half-time rally speech to a team that's not playing well.....It seems perfectly appropriate to the moment, and I can imagine millions of Americans who would be thrilled to hear their president speak with this kind of energy and passion.

1- There's a reason those half time pep talks aren't broadcast out into the stadium.

2- It is unseemly for the coach of one team to whine when the other team isn't cheering him on.

3-Sometimes the team not performing well needs to be told what they are doing wrong so they can improve.

I would come down somewhere between Professor Althouse and freshlegacy. I wouldn't necessarily use the word "scared," but I think I might use the word "rattled." He does seem a little edgier than usual, without his famous composure. Put it this way: if this were a halftime speech, the team would be losing by at least a touchdown.

I didn't vote for the guy, but this scares me. I hope he can get his sh** together ASAP.

I, for one, felt reasonably safe with a president who couldn't be fazed, at least in public, except for the first little bit after the planes started hitting the WTC on 9/11. Despite being at war through much of it, the president over the last 8 years has managed to project calm, regardless of his other faults.

This President isn't projecting calm at all. He may have appeared unflappable during the election (and I think that his demeanor during the banking crisis is a good part of why he is living in the White House, and McCain is not). But not any more.

My worry is not just for the markets, which do react to panic, but also foreign relations. I never thought that I would be happy that Hillary is at Foggy Bottom, but I don't see her panicking nearly as much as President Obama is doing right now.

And this isn't the time to panic. What happens if something drastic happens, like faced the last Administration?

Panic implies weakness and that is a green light to our enemies, and maybe even some of our friends, to challenge our new President. That is not good.

I think maybe mark Twain said that. Or something close to that. Or maybe somebody else said it. Who cares.

This asshole is getting tested for the first time in his life and it's with the responsibility of the world's fate. No way does he have the wisdom or guts to even come close to meeting the challenge. He's just a weak, vain, megalomaniac who will either be drummed out of office leaving behind a wake of destruction or he will consolidate power and become a dictator for life. Fortunately I don't think he has the balls or ruthless gumption to become the latter.

The other thing that scares me is that we are stuck with President Obama for at least the next four years. He can't resign, and better not be impeached. And I am all for doubling the armor on those new limos of his. Think of the order of succession:- Biden (foot in mouth disease)- Pelosi (D-PRCa, dumb as a rock)- Byrd (D-KKK)- Clinton - Geithner (tax cheat)- Gates (Republican?)- Holder (helped sell pardons)- Salazar (my favorite)

madawaskan disgraces the fine town of Madawaska with: you could have read all of those points in Ann's comment section.

Apparently she's got a secret comment section just for certain people because, while there were a few mentions of CAP from commenters on her past entries, I didn't find anyone pointing out their flaws as I have on a few occasions chez moi. And, I doubt whether the facts outlined here would find much purchase from most of her commenters and certainly haven't found any from her.

I disagree with the video's use of the word "fiery." He looks and sounds like he's tattling on the Republicans. "Fiery" would require more engagement and, frankly, better speaking on his part.

I really disliked his "but that's the whole point!" joke about the stimulus bill actually being a spending bill. It's a weak argument that only works if you're happy with spending a trillion dollars in the first place, and if you don't mind that the spending is all on Democratic priorities. If the Republicans aren't happy with either point, who exactly is going to be persuaded by that line?

It's like a man buying his wife an expensive golf club for her birthday. He may not mind the expense or care that she doesn't play, but are those really selling points?

I wonder if he'll get to the point where he'll say, I'm going to hold my breath, and I'll die unless you pass this spending bill!

Heh. It's getting close...

I've asked before, but I'll ask again: At what point will a younger generation rise up and refuse to pay off the debts of their parents? This spending bill is basically a gargantuan political handout to special interests. Think our kids are going to be okay with paying for that? I don't. Pretty vile that we're even considering dropping $1 trillion of debt on them over this, a bill that will almost certainly make the economy worse.

And if they're going to tyrannically saddle us with that kind of debt, the least they could do is just cut each taxpayer a check for that amount. Then we could at least enjoy the cash we're going into debt over.

Are other people feeling more and more like we're at the mercy of tyrants who feel entitled to confiscate whatever they want from us and spend it as they please? Tyrants who also feel entitled to nanny into every minute aspect of our lives? Tyrants we're supposed to be able to vote out but who have so protected themselves and co-opted the press that it's nearly impossible? This is not good.

(I'm not being party specific. Both are doing the same thing, one just presses a little harder on the accelerator.)

Currently, I think we're dooming our future generations to eventual war with whatever countries own most of the debt. There will come a point when the debt is a crushing burden, and people aren't going to like paying for a bunch of contracts that they never even agreed to. People aren't always going to stand for the explanation that, "Well, your parents made these deals, so you have to pay."

And what right do we have to sell future generations into slavery anyway? That's what it is, isn't it? We want all this stuff now, so we'll put the debt off on you people who will be forced to work it off for us. Abominable.

Quayle said... Paraphrasing Mitt Romney:Obama wants to run the largest enterprise in the world. He hasn't run a state. He hasn't run a city. He hasn't run a corner store. He has never run anything. And the idea that he could learn to be president as an internship just doesn't make any sense.

And Republicans rejected Romney because 1/3rd thought they needed a pastor from the Religious Right and about half thought John Mccain deserved it despite all his betrayals of other Republicans because he had ran before and suffered with honor after the enemy captured him.

That McCain was a Senator for life, personally erratic, and nearly incoherent mattered naught. He may have been Bob Dole without the brains but he gave - Sarah! - the Goddess of the Base!

So we ended up with Obama instead of Romney.

And after the election, about 70% of the country agreed that Obama was likely to be more successful than McCain would have been. Those numbers will go down of course...but I shudder to think of America under McCain with his endless POW references and insincere "my friends, my dear friends" salutations, fumbling along devoid of ideas other than "Senate bipartisanship" and "hitting Iran soon."

President Obama is a man who's persona is of style over accomplishment. Those who voted for him can be excused of falling for the hype, but the media, and the political operatives who allowed this to happen are patronizing, and their behavior borders on the criminal.

Mr. Obama will answer questions from reporters at 8 p.m. eastern time this coming Monday.

Reporters wishing to ask questions must submit them by 8 p.m. eastern time Sunday night. A list of approved questions will be available prior to the press conference on Monday. Those reporters who submit rejected questions will be subject to investigation.

"A list of approved questions will be available prior to the press conference on Monday. Those reporters who submit rejected questions will be subject to investigation"

It's going to be fun watching the media deal with Obama. Of course up to now they've been head over heels in love. But idol-worship runs against the grain of journalists' training and instincts. Infatuation will turn, as it usually does, to remorse. Then embarrassment.

Bruce said,,,never thought that I would be happy that Hillary is at Foggy Bottom, but I don't see her panicking nearly as much as President Obama is doing right now.

Better still, General Jones at NSA. At least Jones know what military applications are possible and which are not. Unlike when Bill, Madeline, and Sandy were plotting Tomahawk strikes to send messages.

Ann, you begin to sound more and more like a disappointed lover after your wedding night when you find out that dating was so great, and now you need to bring his croissant/coffee to bed every morning and wash his mother's laundry too (he made soooooooo sweet promises during 2 years of dating, and you were stupid enough to believe him and his friends...)

How easy it is to try and make the accusation of "obstructionism" (aimed squarely at the Republicans), when politicians of both stripes are sensing a massive cliff ahead if they stampede the "stimulus" giveaway through. And those politicians are not as confident in the public's willingness to forgive at election time as our Dear Leader seems to be.

Better still, General Jones at NSA. At least Jones know what military applications are possible and which are not. Unlike when Bill, Madeline, and Sandy were plotting Tomahawk strikes to send messages.

As long as message delivered and noted, it's not a bad tactic. Reagan did the same with Libya and a "in and out" invasion of Grenada to send a message to Fidel. And Reagan failed quickly in Lebanon, realized he had been duped to embroil us for the lang haul in a high-casualty quagmire..and wisely beat feet.

Better certainly than invading a country, beating their military, then announce we will be there for and endless amount of time and spend a trillion to bring democracy to "noble freedom lovers" who inflicted 38,000 of their 42,000 casualties on us after we "liberated" them.

Better we go back to the Powell Doctrine. We fight ONLY in the vital interests of America and no other country unless have a broadly approved by the public defense pact with them. We fight with overwhelming force, only with overwhelming approval, end matters quickly, and have a fast exit strategy.

As much as possible, we return the military to something whose success or failure hits all Americans, not just the rural, the lower middle class, and multigeneration professional military families.

So we're clear; Obama says we must have change and avoid the policies of the past, yet massive government spending is a policy of the past and has never worked. If going to far back bothers people, fine; look at Japan--they implemented the same damn thing Obama is pushing and it extended their recession 10 years (I believe they still haven't recovered.)

He then says that he welcomes honest debate. Really? Why then has the text of this bill not been published and why is he so desperate to shut down debate? (Rhetorical question--he knows this is a pig of a bill. For example; how does pushing more Americans to go deeply into debt for a useless college degree going to help the economy?)

PS. I think tax cuts for middle class are also a waste of time. I'd push to close off the feature of the tax code to ensure ALL Americans who earn income pay some income tax, even if only 5%.

Tax cuts for businesses, repeal of Sarbanes-Oxley and other deregulation of non-financial institution businesses is what's called for. (The latest consumer protection act is another anti-consumer, anti-productivity bill--thank you congress and Bush.)

"Ann, you begin to sound more and more like a disappointed lover after your wedding night..."

Now that you're goneAll that's left is a band of goldAll that's left of the dream I holdIs a band of goldAnd the memories of what love could beIf you are still here with me...Ooh, don't you know that I wait in the darkness of my lonely roomFilled with sadness, filled with gloomHoping soon that you'll walkBack through that doorAnd love me like you tried before...

hollywood wags is correct. “No drama Obama” is the operative phrase: Obama’ campaign for POTUS was an incredibly well-orchestrated act designed to compliment the Cult of Obama, which concealed the freshman senator’s invisible background as well as his staggering lack of experience. It was all an act. It was all for the cameras and for the crowds. But it’s showtime now, and Obama the actor has no idea what he’s doing.

I agree. You can tell he's fired up because his delivery isn't as smooth as it usually is.

What I don't like is the apparent message that this bill is the best his and Obey's staffs could cobble together and that it must be passed because of the urgency of "doing something."

This is money that could send a fleet of rockets and astronauts to the moon with Vicuna chairs, establish a colony and probably start one on Mars, as well, for crying out loud.

I would think that "doing something that works" is more important than just doing something. Otherwise we're probably throwing away several trillion dollars more after the ones the bankers evaporated.

If he's worried about his frazzled staffers, how about this: do away with the alternative minimum tax, corporate income tax and the tax on interest and dividends, and declare a two-year suspension of payroll taxes.

how about this: do away with the alternative minimum tax, corporate income tax and the tax on interest and dividends, and declare a two-year suspension of payroll taxes.

Simple answer: If tax cuts worked then we wouldn't be in the situation we're in right now. The tax rates that we've had since the 2001 Bush tax cuts are substantially lower than they have been during any administration since Herbert Hoover's (there's an uncanny resemblance for you.)

The one thing we know is that the massive tax cuts passed in 2001 (and expanded in 2003 and 2006) did not prevent the present situation, though they did contribute to a ballooning of the national debt to over ten trillion dollars. So your idea to use tax cuts to fight the present economic meltdown, after we've seen the utter failure of tax cuts, is like fighting a fire by trying to drown it under a flood of gasoline.

Tax cuts are fine, if you're willing to live within your means. This uncontrolled spending by the Bush administration, and now by Obama and the cast of characters that he has to work with, is what's the problem.

I'd meet you half way and suggest that if you could balance the budget with tax cuts, then that would be fine. Of course, Clinton increased taxes, and balanced the budget.

But as for living within your means, if you are going to cut goverment revenue then you don't go start a war (since wars tend to be very expensive monetarily.) Granted there are other ways that spending ran rampant the past few years (the Medicare prescription drug giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry will probably rank as one of the worst bills ever passed).

But the idea of cutting taxes first and then somehow adjusting the budget is ridiculous. It would be like taking a job for less pay first and then figuring out if you can afford it once you've already signed the contract. If you really want to cut taxes then show me the budget that fits them first, then we can talk.

Estimated and Projected From the mouth of the proverbial horse. See how many times the weasel words projected and estimated show up. See how conviently the media and the drones who unthinkingly listen to the media ignore.

PROJECTED...ESTIMATED....not real surplus.

The second consecutive surplus excluding Social Security. Excluding Social Security, the surplus is projected to be $80 billion this year. This is the second consecutive surplus on this basis, for the first time since 1956-57

Sure. Excluding Social Security and Medicare. If I exclude my house payment, car payment, insurances and utilty bills...I too can have a surplus.

All these inconvenient actual cash flow items that interfere with a PROJECTED surplus. Creative accounting is so cute.

Then again, the American people may be tired of force-feeding by 2012. I'm not betting that way, though

The thing with Barack Obama is, he's ripe for self-implosion. Eventually all his negatives (which are gently scrubbed away by his enablers in media and staffers) have the power to bring him down. He is also temperamentally unsuited to being questioned, it seems, or to be able to tailor his personality to reflect a nuance in public opinion.

Eli, your logic makes no sense. Right now Obama is proposing to add $800 billion in expenses and personal tax cuts. The counter proposal is to cut CORPORATE taxes and to reduce non-finance industry corporate regulation. This would be far less than the $800 billion proposed and would have a direct impact on what drives our economy--business. The best personal taxes to reduce are capital gains. Combined with the corporate tax cuts, this will help capital flow in the system. (The company I work for would be directly impacted by this--this would free up cash with our very large clients to spend on our equipment [it saves them money, but it's hard to justify the immediate cash expenditures.])

I don't think he's unflappable; I think he doesn't give a shit. The only time I saw him remotely passionate is after Wright dissed him at the National Press Club. Only after Wright made fun of him did he disown him: telling.

The best part about the video is when, at a loss to say anything in defense of his own policies, Obama reverts to the rhetoric of his early campaign and goes straight after Bush.

I mean, it isn't inaccurate to say that Bush ballooned the deficient to criminal levels, but that doesn't have anything to do with Obama's plan to deal with it. For better or worse (and its looking far worse than it is better right now), we said to Obama, "Hey, sure, you want to deal with this thing, go ahead." By making the "its Bush's fault" argument out, Obama's basically complaining that he got elected, which isn't a good omen for the rest of his Presidency.

Speaking of jamming things down people's throats, maybe Obama thinks HE is Bill Clinton and WE are all Monica Lewinsky. At this rate, with the veins on his neck popping out, Obama is a good candidate for a heart attack by Day 100.

I want Obama to fail. I want his every policy to fail because his failure is good for America. A socialist America is a beaten, grievance-stricken, weak, and un-American America. If Obama fails, our military and our social institutions will thrive. If Obama succeeds, we shall become like Russia and China of the 90's: we'll have to have ration cards to purchase food.